Transnational Movements in Syria

Introduction

Understanding the political transformations of the Middle East is impossible without considering the phenomenon of Transnational Movements in Syria. From the early twentieth century to the present, Syria has continuously stood at the center of four key ideological currents: Pan-Arabism, Muslim Brotherhood–style Islamism, the Axis of Resistance, and Salafi Jihadism. This juxtaposition and interconnection were not merely outcomes of governmental decisions; rather, they stemmed from a multilayered social fabric, a unique geopolitical position, and the historical identity of this land.

After the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, Syria entered the era of state formation, yet the newly drawn borders did not fully correspond to the historical and social identity of its population. This mismatch caused different segments of society to gravitate toward discourses defined beyond national boundaries. Simultaneously, Syria’s position at the intersection of the Arab Mashriq, the Mediterranean, Palestine, and Anatolia made it a natural path for the formation and transmission of ideological currents and transnational political networks.

These conditions caused Syria, throughout various periods, to be part of several ideological and political constellations. During the period of the United Arab Republic and afterward, Pan-Arabism became not only the official identity but also the framework of political legitimacy. From the mid-twentieth century onward, Muslim Brotherhood Islamism developed into a social actor and then into a political opponent of the state. After 1980, the Axis of Resistance became the central pillar of Syrian foreign policy. In recent decades, Salafi Jihadist networks turned Syria into one of the world’s most important security arenas.

This sustained presence within transnational movements has had profound consequences for Syria:
• Strengthening its geopolitical role and turning the country into one of the region’s strategic nodes
• Increasing the complexity and fragility of domestic politics
• Introducing repeated waves of external ideologies into the social fabric
• Continuous dependence on and confrontation with regional and extra-regional powers

In other words, Syria has not merely been a battleground but both a shaping and shaped actor within the transnational movements of the Middle East. The following article examines this historical trajectory and its effects on Syrian domestic politics and national identity.

1. Foundational Factors — Why Did Syria Become the Natural Environment for Transnational Movements?

To understand why Transnational Movements in Syria gained such extensive and historical influence, three essential layers must be examined: geopolitics, social-identity structure, and the construction of the modern Syrian state. Together, these layers created circumstances in which major regional ideologies—Pan-Arabism, Islamism, the Axis of Resistance, and Jihadism—could easily encompass segments of Syrian society and politics. Syria’s position is not merely geographical but historical and civilizational; therefore, since the fall of the Ottoman Empire, more than any other state in the region, it has been exposed to transnational ideologies.

1-1. Syria’s Exceptional Geopolitical Position

1-1-1. Situated Among Three Worlds: Arab, Iranian, and Anatolian

Syria lies at the crossroads of three civilizational and political spheres, each carrying its own transnational ideologies and projects:
• The Arab world, carrying Arab nationalist currents and Sunni Islamism
• Iran, which became the carrier of a Shi‘a transnational narrative and the Axis of Resistance
• Anatolia/Turkey, carrying neo-Ottoman narratives and distinct political traditions

This location historically placed Syria within the arena of competition among these spheres. In other words, Syria belongs fully to none of them, yet lies on the periphery of all, and this “in-betweenness” has amplified the penetration of transnational discourses.

1-1-2. Proximity to Palestine and Its Impact on Domestic and Foreign Policy

Syria’s geographic closeness to Palestine has been one of the most influential factors shaping its politics. The Arab–Israeli conflict not only mobilized public sentiment but also provided structural conditions for the penetration of two major transnational currents:
• Pan-Arabism, which centered its legitimacy on the liberation of Palestine
• The Axis of Resistance, which made Palestine the foundation of its security-strategic identity

Thus, Syria has always been at the “front line” of the Palestinian issue, which strengthened its attraction to transnational projects.

1-1-3. A Node in Trade and Military Routes

Syria’s position in the heart of the Levant made it the natural passageway between Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Palestine, the Mediterranean, and Turkey.
• Historic trade routes and military campaigns passed through Damascus.
• Any regional power seeking influence in the Arab East needed a presence in Syria.
• This position facilitated the movement of groups, ideological networks, and foreign actors.

Consequently, Syria became not only a passage for armies but also a conduit for ideologies.

1-1-4. Damascus as a Civilizational Center of Legitimacy

Damascus, the oldest political capital of the Arab world, holds symbolic significance:
• The Umayyad Caliphate originated there
• Many Arab nationalist and Islamist thinkers grew up in the Levant
• Political movements have long sought legitimacy through association with “al-Sham.”

This cultural-historical status ensured that every transnational ideology sought, in some way, to integrate Syria into its sphere.

1-2. A Diverse Social-Identity Structure

1-2-1. Sectarian Diversity: Sunni, Alawite, Christian, Druze, Isma‘ili

Syria possesses one of the most diverse sectarian compositions in the Arab world. This diversity has been both a source of resilience and a condition of vulnerability to external ideological influence:
• Sunni Islamism flourished in major cities
• Minority sects at times used regional currents to strengthen their positions
• Central governments also employed transnational ideologies to balance this diversity

As a result, Syrian society was neither homogeneous nor resistant to external discourses.

1-2-2. Cross-Border Ethnic Linkages: Arabs, Kurds, Armenians, Turkmen

The borders drawn for Syria after World War I enclosed communities that were part of wider regional ethnic networks:
• Syrian Kurds were connected to Kurds in Iraq and Turkey
• Syrian Armenians were tied to Armenians in Lebanon and the Caucasus
• Turkmen shared cultural and linguistic ties with Turkey

This situation encouraged Syrian governments to rely on broader narratives—such as Pan-Arabism or the Axis of Resistance—to build a unifying transnational framework.

1-2-3. The Dual Capacity of Social Diversity

Syria’s diversity produced two simultaneous outcomes:

1. Easier absorption of transnational currents
2. The state’s need to use large-scale ideologies to maintain cohesion

Thus, the same factor that enabled ideological penetration also pushed governments toward adopting transnational narratives.

1-3. Historical Weakness in Forming an Independent National Identity

1-3-1. Ottoman Legacy and the Ambiguity of Political Identity

For centuries, Syria was part of the Ottoman Empire. Its political identity was primarily local, urban, and religious, not national. After the creation of the modern state, society remained in transition from an imperial to a national order.

1-3-2. The Role of French Colonialism and the Creation of Artificial Borders

France drew borders that aligned neither with social realities nor with popular conceptions of “the land of Syria.” These fragile borders enabled transnational ideologies—Arabism, Islamism, or resistance—to compete with “Syrian nationality.”

1-3-3. Competition Among Pan-Arabists, Islamists, and Ethno-nationalists Since the 1940s

From the earliest years of the modern state, three major narratives competed over Syria’s political identity. This situation resulted in:
• The failure to construct an independent Syrian national identity
• Governments’ reliance on transnational ideologies
• Society’s continued openness to regional currents

1-3-4. Ba‘athism as a Substitute for National Identity

From the 1960s onward, Ba‘athism replaced “Syrian nationality” with the narrative of the “Arab nation.” This produced:
• A weakened Syrian national identity
• A strengthened transnational ideology
• A state inclined toward regional and transnational projects

1-4. The Role of the State and the Army in Prioritizing Transnational Alliances

1-4-1. The Security-Centered Nature of the Syrian State Since the 1960s

Successive coups, external wars, and regional rivalries pushed Syria toward a political model in which security dominated governance. In this environment, the state required transnational alliances for both power and legitimacy.

1-4-2. The Army’s Ideological Function

Under Ba‘ath rule, the army became not merely a professional force but a carrier of Arab nationalist ideology and later the ideology of resistance. This made the army a gateway for transnational narratives to enter the structure of the state.

1-4-3. The Regime’s Use of Transnational Alliances for External Balancing

Syria has continually faced external challenges:
• The Israeli threat
• Rivalry with Ba‘athist Iraq
• U.S. pressure
• Regional competition with Turkey and Saudi Arabia

To balance these pressures, Syria repeatedly relied on transnational projects—from union with Nasser to the Axis of Resistance. Thus, the Syrian state evolved in a way that made transnational alliances a natural component of its survival.

In sum, the combination of three factors—an exceptional geopolitical position, a socially diverse society linked to transnational networks, and a historically weak national identity alongside a security-centered state structure—placed Syria in a position where it could both receive and generate transnational movements.

For this reason, the four currents of Pan-Arabism, Muslim Brotherhood Islamism, the Shi‘a Axis of Resistance, and Salafi Jihadism each succeeded, at different periods, in controlling parts of Syrian society or politics.

2. The Four Main Currents of Transnational Movements in Syria

This section examines the four currents of Pan-Arabism, Sunni Muslim Brotherhood Islamism, the Shi‘a Axis of Resistance, and Salafi–Jihadism—currents that collectively form the main pillars of what we understand today as Transnational Movements in Syria. Each current is important not only historically but also due to its structural impact on the Syrian state, society, and foreign policy.

2-1. Pan-Arabism: Syria as the Intellectual Pillar and the Arena of Competition Among Arab Powers

2-1-1. Intellectual Roots in the Land of al-Sham

Before Pan-Arabism flourished in Nasser’s Cairo, it emerged in the intellectual environment of the Levant. Damascus, Beirut, and Aleppo hosted intellectual circles in the late Ottoman era that focused on “Arab unity,” “the revival of Arab identity,” and “the sense of deprivation within the Ottoman Empire.” Many founders of Arab nationalist thought—from Sati‘al-Husri to Zaki al-Arsuzi—were either originally Syrian or were shaped within Syrian intellectual environments.

This deep intellectual grounding ensured that Syria was, from the outset, not a peripheral player but the “intellectual center” of Pan-Arabism.

2-1-2. Union with Egypt (1958–1961): The Peak of a Transnational Experiment

The formation of the United Arab Republic was one of the most ambitious unity experiments in the Arab world. Syria entered the union with broad popular enthusiasm, yet the political and class structures of the two countries were entirely different. Soon, military rivalries, class tensions, and fears among Syrian elites of becoming “subordinate to Cairo” became evident. The collapse of the union in 1961 did not end Pan-Arabism; rather, it opened a new phase of competition.

2-1-3. Ba‘athism: Reproducing Pan-Arabism in the Structure of the State

With the Ba‘ath Party’s rise to power in 1963, Pan-Arabism transformed from an intellectual movement into the “official identity of the state.” Syrian Ba‘athism defined a transnational project:
• The liberation of Palestine as a historical mission
• Syria’s leadership role in the Arab world
• Attempts to reunify with Egypt or Iraq (although unsuccessful)

This stage turned Pan-Arabism into the ideological pillar of the army and security apparatus, and many of Syria’s foreign policy decisions were made to enhance Damascus’s Arab regional standing.

2-1-4. Rivalry with Ba‘athist Iraq: Two Conflicting Pan-Arabisms

From the 1970s onward, instead of converging with Ba‘athist Iraq, Syria entered one of the harshest transnational rivalries in the region. Both states claimed leadership of the Arab world, yet Syrian Ba‘athism was defined by a socio-military orientation and the Axis of Resistance, while Iraqi Ba‘athism followed authoritarian nationalism and different regional policies. This conflict demonstrated that Transnational Movements in Syria do not necessarily lead to unity; rather, they may produce new fractures.

Overall impact of Pan-Arabism on Syria:
• The consolidation of a security-driven state through the justification of “Arab unity.”
• Providing legitimacy for Syria’s regional role
• Weakening the formation of an independent national identity
• Creating a platform for large-scale regional rivalries (Egypt, Iraq, Palestine)

2-2. Sunni Muslim Brotherhood Islamism — From Domestic Challenge to Identity Polarization

2-2-1. The Emergence of the Syrian Brotherhood and Social Network-Building

Although the Muslim Brotherhood was founded in Egypt, Syria developed one of its most important branches beginning in the 1950s. The Syrian Brotherhood, unlike its Egyptian counterpart, focused on three pillars:
A. Preserving the social role of the traditional urban religious class
B. Opposing the secular Ba‘athist influence
C. Redefining Islamic identity as an alternative to Pan-Arabism

This movement built extensive charitable, educational, and cultural networks in Aleppo, Hama, Damascus, and Homs.

Radicalization of the Brotherhood–State Relationship
From the 1970s onward, ideological conflict between Sunni Islamists and the Ba‘ath state intensified. The Ba‘ath sought to marginalize religious identity, while the Brotherhood felt that large parts of the Sunni population were being sidelined. Meanwhile, more militant factions emerged within the Brotherhood that leaned toward armed confrontation.

2-2-2. Hama 1982: A Turning Point and a Lasting Rift

Armed clashes between the Brotherhood and the state culminated in the Hama uprising, which resulted in one of the harshest crackdowns in modern Middle Eastern history. Its consequences for Transnational Movements in Syria were profound:
• A state centered around an empowered security core
• Relocation of Brotherhood networks abroad (Jordan, Europe, Egypt)
• A lasting psychological rift between parts of the Sunni community and the government
• The institutionalization of Syria’s identity as an “anti-Brotherhood state”

This event entrenched long-term identity polarization in Syria.

The Brotherhood’s impact on state and society:
• Further securitization of domestic politics
• Greater cohesion within military institutions
• Expanded security oversight over mosques and religious organizations
• Changes in urban patterns in regions that experienced severe repression

The division between the state and the Brotherhood later facilitated the rise of Salafi–Jihadist currents—one of the key transitional pathways in the chain of transnational movements.

2-3. The Shi‘a Axis of Resistance — Syria as the Central Link in a Cohesive Transnational Network

2-3-1. The Roots of the Tehran–Damascus Alliance

After the Iranian Revolution, Syria was one of the few Arab states that forged an alliance with the Islamic Republic. The reasons for this convergence combined geopolitical considerations and strategic rivalry with Iraq:
• Common enmity toward Saddam’s Iraq
• Syria’s need for reliable military and economic support
• Iran’s use of Syrian territory as a corridor to Lebanon
• Shared opposition to Israel

This alliance became one of the most enduring transnational relationships in the Middle East.

2-3-2. Syria’s Role in the Formation and Strengthening of Hezbollah

By controlling the routes between Iran and Lebanon, Syria played a decisive role in the formation and organization of Hezbollah. Damascus:
• Enabled the transfer of equipment and trainers
• Acted as a mediator between Iran and Hezbollah for operational coordination
• Managed the political environment of Lebanon through its military presence

From the 1990s onward, this cooperation became further institutionalized, turning Syria into the “critical connector” of the Axis of Resistance network.

2-3-3. Domestic Consequences for Syria

The Axis of Resistance has been one of the most influential forces shaping Syria’s political–economic landscape in recent decades:
• Security dependence on Iranian military support
• Rising international costs due to hostility with the U.S. and Israel
• Demographic changes due to the presence of aligned foreign forces
• Consolidation of the security state under the justification of “resistance”

This transnational alliance shaped Syria’s foreign policy more than any other current.

2-3-4. Syria’s Position in the Axis of Resistance

Syria was not merely a member but the “middle pillar” of the Axis: Iran to the east, Lebanon to the west, and Syria in between. This geographical structure made the axis functional, rendering Syria’s role irreplaceable.

2-4. Salafi–Jihadism: Syria Becomes the Battlefield of the Global Jihadist Movement

2-4-1. Roots: From Afghan Networks to the Iraq Crisis

The earliest jihadist cells in Syria during the 1990s and early 2000s were limited in activity; Syria was not yet a primary theater for jihadism. However, two factors prepared the ground for its expansion:
A. The Ba‘ath state’s security pressure on Islamist currents, pushing segments of youth toward radical discourses
B. The collapse of Iraq after 2003, which produced new transnational networks along Syria’s eastern borders

Thus, Syria became a transit point—but not yet the main battlefield.

2-4-2. The Civil War and Syria’s Transformation into the Center of Global Jihadism

With growing security vacuums and the loss of state control over various regions, jihadist networks from the Caucasus, the Gulf, North Africa, Europe, and Central Asia entered Syria. Al-Qaeda and later ISIS used Syria as a primary base.

This current represented the most extensive manifestation of Transnational Movements in Syria: thousands of fighters, financial networks, fluid ideology, and erased borders.

2-4-3. Structural and Long-term Consequences of Jihadist Activity

• Severe destruction of urban and rural infrastructure
  • Intervention of global powers (the U.S., Russia, Turkey)
  • Geographical fragmentation of society and mass displacement
  • Renewed identity patterns among the younger generation
  • Increased state dependence on foreign allies

As a result, Syria shifted from a regional actor to the “battlefield of global jihad,” an unprecedented condition in modern Middle Eastern history.

In summary, the four major currents—Pan-Arabism, Muslim Brotherhood Islamism, the Shi‘a Axis of Resistance, and Salafi–Jihadism—shaped not only Syria’s domestic and foreign politics but also turned the country into one of the most significant arenas of transnational activism in the region. Of these currents, Pan-Arabism and the Axis of Resistance played the greatest role in “state consolidation,” while Brotherhood Islamism and Jihadism created the greatest “structural challenges” for the state.

3. Structural Consequences of Syria’s Continuous Presence in Transnational Movements

Syria’s ongoing involvement in the four major transnational currents—Pan-Arabism, Sunni Islamist Ikhwanism, the Shiite Axis of Resistance, and Salafi-Jihadism—was not merely a sequence of historical events; it deeply and permanently shaped the state structure, policymaking patterns, societal behavior, and the country’s socio-economic development trajectory. This section explains how this long-term process transformed Syria into a state whose national identity is interwoven with transnational layers, and whose government is difficult to understand without its external alliances.

3-1. The Erosion of an Independent Nation-State Formation

3-1-1. A Half-Formed National Identity and the Competition of Transnational Ideologies

One of the most important consequences of Syria’s sustained presence in transnational movements was the weakening of the “nation-state project.” In most Middle Eastern countries, national identity during the twentieth century gradually formed through education, the army, media, and foreign policy. But in Syria, this process was continually disrupted by competing grand ideologies:

• Pan-Arabism placed Arab identity above national identity.
• Ikhwanism prioritized Islamic identity over national belonging.
• The Axis of Resistance positioned “anti-Israeli” and “anti-imperialist” identity at the center of politics.
• Jihadism replaced national identity with a transnational Islamic Ummah identity.

This layered overlap of identities prevented Syria from forming a unified national narrative—a narrative that both state and society could agree upon.

3-1-2. The State as the Carrier of Ideology, Not the Expression of the Nation

Since the 1960s, successive Syrian governments relied on transnational ideologies to legitimize themselves. This produced several key outcomes:

• State legitimacy stemmed more from “transnational missions” than from “domestic consent.”
• The army and security forces became the “guardians of a transnational mission.”
• Society assumed a secondary role in the state’s narrative.

For this reason, even when Syria faced internal crises, the government prioritized preserving its regional role over rebuilding its relationship with society.

3-1-3. The Influence of Foreign Actors on Identity Formation

From the 1980s onward, foreign actors such as Iran, Palestinian groups, Hezbollah, and even jihadist networks played significant roles in shaping the political culture of segments of Syrian society. This contributed to the fragility of national identity and often produced multilayered and conflicting loyalties.

3-2. The Securitization of Politics and the Strengthening of an Authoritarian State

3-2-1. The Military–Ideology Nexus as a Structural Relationship

Both Pan-Arabism and the Axis of Resistance framed the Syrian military as the carrier of a “mission.” This special status had major implications:

• The military assumed roles beyond a conventional institution: guardian of ideology, Arab unity, resistance, and national security.
• The security apparatus expanded to confront Ikhwani and jihadist threats.
• Political decision-making centers became extremely centralized.

Over time, the Syrian state became not a development-oriented state but a “security-oriented state.”

3-2-2. Restricted Democratization Due to Transnational Threats

Persistent Ikhwani threats during the 1960s–1980s, and the rise of jihadism after 2000, allowed the state to justify many political restrictions by invoking “transnational dangers.” The result:

• A closed political environment
• Weak civil society institutions
• Independent parties either failed to emerge or remained marginal

Thus, transnational ideologies were not only sources of inspiration for the state but also tools to justify authoritarianism.

3-2-3. Security Dominance in Daily Life

After the events of Hama in 1982 and the crises of the 2010s, security surveillance intensified over schools, mosques, professional organizations, and media. Security discourse became the dominant language of politics.

3-3. The War Economy, Sanctions, and the Decline of National Reconstruction Capacity

3-3-1. The Economic Costs of Transnational Alliances

Although the alliance with the Axis of Resistance created strategic advantages, it also imposed heavy economic burdens:

• Extensive U.S. and European sanctions
• Restrictions on foreign investment
• Tight state control over currency and foreign trade
• Expansion of the informal economy

Gradually, Syria’s economic structure shifted from a classical state-controlled model to a “security-interventionist economy.”

3-3-2. Infrastructure Destruction and Erosion of Human Capital

The presence of jihadist groups, sectarian conflicts, and regional interventions in the 2010s led to the destruction of large segments of Syria’s infrastructure:

• The collapse of industries in Aleppo and Homs
• The destruction of energy networks in the east and north
• The disappearance of tourism
• The migration of millions of workers and specialists

This long-term degradation was not merely a consequence of war but also the result of decades of conflicts within the framework of transnational movements.

3-3-3. Economic Dependence on Foreign Allies

To cover expenses and offset sanctions, the Syrian government became dependent on actors such as Iran, Russia, and aligned commercial networks. This reduced economic independence and shifted the economy toward “political transactions.”

3-4. Social Polarization and the Weakening of Social Capital

3-4-1. Sectarian and Ethnic Divisions

Transnational movements often elevated certain internal groups while marginalizing others:

• Pan-Arabism: Emphasized Arab identity, weakening the status of Kurds and non-Arab minorities.
• Ikhwanism: Prioritized Sunni Islamic identity, raising concerns among Alawites, Christians, and secular groups.
• The Axis of Resistance: Close alignment with Iran and Hezbollah heightened sensitivities among segments of the Sunni population.
• Jihadism: Radicalized religious identity, producing severe sectarian and urban–rural polarization.

These layers of division eroded Syria’s social capital and reduced trust among communities.

3-4-2. Migration and Population Redistribution

Millions migrated abroad or were internally displaced during the 2010s. These changes had long-term consequences:

• Alteration of the demographic composition of certain regions
• Reduced diversity in some areas
• Strengthening of regional and local identities
• Disruption of traditional coexistence networks

3-4-3. Foreign Powers and Shifting Patterns of Loyalty

Transnational alliances caused some domestic groups to develop loyalties beyond national borders: to Arab nationalist currents, to the Axis of Resistance, to jihadist networks, or to foreign states. This weakened national cohesion.

3-5. Syria’s Transformation into a Stage for Regional Power Competition

3-5-1. A Geopolitical Crossroads of Alliances

All four transnational currents viewed Syria as a central node:

• For Pan-Arabists: Syria was the core of the Levant
• For Ikhwanists: Syria represented a major branch of the global Muslim Brotherhood
• For the Axis of Resistance: Syria was the vital link between Tehran and Beirut
• For jihadists: It became the most important theater of global operations

This role naturally turned Syria into a constant battleground.

3-5-2. The Entry of Multiple Foreign Actors

Over time, Turkey, Iran, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United States, and Russia each became part of Syria’s crisis or its potential solution. This foreign involvement was a direct consequence of Syria’s presence in transnational networks.

3-5-3. The Erosion of National Sovereignty

With multilayered competitions at play, the Syrian state in practice ceded part of its foreign policy, security decision-making, and even economic choices to external actors. This shift was not temporary but structural.

In sum, the consequences of Syria’s presence in Transnational Movements in Syria were not confined to foreign policy; they affected nearly every sphere of social, economic, and institutional life. Rather than developing an independent national identity and a state-driven developmental model, Syria became entangled in a web of cross-border loyalties and rivalries—a web whose effects remain visible today.

Conclusion

A historical examination of Syria’s relationship with Transnational Movements in Syria since the early twentieth century shows that the country has not been a peripheral actor, but rather one of the main engines for producing and reproducing transnational ideologies in the Middle East. The central question of the article was: Why has Syria, over the course of a century, consistently been involved in four major transnational currents—pan-Arabism, Brotherhood-style Islamism, the Axis of Resistance, and Salafi jihadism? The analysis in the previous sections demonstrated that this involvement is not merely the result of episodic political decisions, but is rooted in the country’s social structure, its unique geopolitical position, and the nature of state-building in Syria.

The multiethnic and multireligious structure of Syrian society, combined with its historical connections to Bilad al-Sham, Palestine, and the broader Islamic world, has meant that identity boundaries in this country have never been entirely national or limited. Arab identity in Damascus and Aleppo, Islamic identity in religious centers, and extensive social networks have made Syria a setting in which transnational ideologies easily take root and draw strength.

From the fall of the Ottoman Empire to current developments, Syria has been located at a crossroads where every regional transformation affects it directly. The Arab-Israeli wars, conflicts in Iraq, Turkish–Iranian rivalries, and crises in Lebanon have never been detached from Syria. This geographic centrality has continually turned the country into a transit zone for Palestinian movements, Islamist currents, and regional resistance networks. Therefore, Syria’s placement at the heart of transnational alliances has been less a matter of choice and more a structural condition.

Successive Syrian governments—whether the unstable republics prior to 1970 or the long period of Ba‘athist rule—have consistently relied on ties with transnational projects to compensate for limited domestic legitimacy. Nasserist pan-Arabism in the 1950s and 1960s, the Axis of Resistance from the 1980s to recent decades, or the instrumental use of jihadist groups in specific periods were all mechanisms for consolidating regime stability and increasing Syria’s weight within the Middle East’s security environment.

Overall, it can be said that due to a combination of multilayered social identity, a sensitive geopolitical position, and vulnerable state-building, Syria has been structurally exposed to alignment with transnational movements. This alignment enabled Syria to emerge as one of the central actors in pan-Arabism, Islamism, the Axis of Resistance, and jihadism. Yet Transnational Movements in Syria, rather than granting Syria enduring regional power and influence, imposed high political, security, and economic costs on the country and hindered the formation of a stable national identity and a coherent prioritization of domestic development.